[sheriffwoody]

just got in and found out that Cav missed out on a medal (coming 28th i think), and he said that he "didn't blame his team mates" etc and also see a tweet on the BBC sports site that says
"@MarkCavendish and the GB team are the best in the world but can't drag 100 cyclists around 250km and win as well. Good effort GB!""

i don't get this, why would it be the teams fault? why does he need his team mates to help him win etc? when that guy broke away with about an hour and 45mins to go and there was a 40second gap, why didn't Cav just chase him down?

and what does that tweet mean? "can't drag 100 cyclists" ?

[CooperUK]

In the peleton (the main group, plus in other smaller groups) they take it in turn to go at the front so those behind have reduced wind resistance. The other teams didn't take their turns so GB had to suffer all the wind resistance.

However, GB should have chased the breakaway group far earlier. They blew it...bad tactical decision-making. I wonder if they had bad comms with their team management as the commentators were complaining of having no info about the gap to the breakaway group.

The "drag 100 cyclists" refers to having them in their slipstream all the time rather than gaining some benefit from having others in front for a while.

[wbabbington]

Originally Posted by tailwhip2000

just got in and found out that Cav missed out on a medal (coming 28th i think), and he said that he "didn't blame his team mates" etc and also see a tweet on the BBC sports site that says
"@MarkCavendish and the GB team are the best in the world but can't drag 100 cyclists around 250km and win as well. Good effort GB!""

i don't get this, why would it be the teams fault? why does he need his team mates to help him win etc? when that guy broke away with about an hour and 45mins to go and there was a 40second gap, why didn't Cav just chase him down?

and what does that tweet mean? "can't drag 100 cyclists" ?

As a sprinter it's all about the final couple of KMs for Cav. He needs a team around him to do all the hard work so he can sit back and conserve his strength for the end sprint. By hard work I mean chase down any breakaways and keep the peloton moving at a reasonably fast pace to try and tire others out. A sprinter usually has a 'lead out train' that will pull them all the way to the finish line and then they can do there thing with about 500 meters to go. A cyclist sat in a slipstream uses about 30% less energy then a guy out front. Cav is not the type of rider to chase other people down, he may well catch them but would be absolutely spent and have nothing left. For that you need the time trial guys who can go fast and hard for long distances, like Wiggo and Froome.

What he means by dragging other cyclists is that no other teams were helping out chasing down the break away. In, for example the Tour de France the sprinters teams will usually work together to bring back a breakaway so that their sprinters have a chance at the end. This will usually be 2 or 3 teams with 6 or 7 riders from each team taking their share at the front and increasing the pelotons speed. But in the Olympics each team is only 5 riders (including the sprinter who wont want to do any of the work so they're fresh for the end) and nobody was helping out GB. So it was left to 4 guys to try and chase down a group of 20ish, which was never going to work.

[sheriffwoody]

does having 3 or 4 guys at the front REALLY make much aerodynamic difference to those behind?

it's not like in motor racing when behind a car where there is a clear shift of air etc and the chance to go faster.
if i was sat behind another cyclist i don't think i would feel THAT much benefit?

[deantown]

I saw Cavendish being interviewed,he was so disappointed. I feel so sorry for him. But he will bounce backfrom this.

[sheriffwoody]

Why didn't Wiggo go for it then and try to win?

If he has the endurance to push harder for longer than Cav why wasn't he "allowed" to try and win it and why was it only Cav who was meant to win?

[wbabbington]

Originally Posted by tailwhip2000

Why didn't Wiggo go for it then and try to win?

If he has the endurance to push harder for longer than Cav why wasn't he "allowed" to try and win it and why was it only Cav who was meant to win?

That's where tactics come into it, which GB got wrong this time. 9 times out of 10 the break away would have been caught and Cav could do his thing. Often they don't catch them until they are inside the last Km. But by the time it was obvious they wouldn't catch them it was too late for anyone to make up the difference.

As for why not let Wiggins go on his own, well he wouldn't be able to sustain the pace needed on is own to get the win. None of the riders could do it. Cycling road events are all about working as a team and get a win as a team. It was 'meant to be Cav' because everyone expected there to be a bunch sprint at the end of which he is the fastest person out there and should have won it easily.

Slip streaming in cycling does make a big difference to energy levels. If you look at teams on mountain stages for example there is always at least one person protecting their leader and helping him out. For the average joe I would imagine that regardless of the number of people you have in front it wouldn't make a difference but at the elite level it certainly does.

[loz]

Disappointed for him personally, but glad in some ways as it might shut the british media - and BBC in particular - up a bit and stop them bigging up every single GB athlete as if they are some sure fire guaranteed winner.

If they simply said this athlete is in with a chance of a medal but recognised that anything can happen, then we can all be pleased and surprised when they win one, instead of being disappointed when they 'fail'. I mean, why are the BBC now billing this as a 'failure'? Cavendish isn't a failure, its just that there can only be one winner, and this time Cavendish didn't.

The only think he 'failed' to do was live up to false expectations.

Don't they think every athlete competing in the Olympics is also trying their hardest, and might just win, not just team GB?

One of the reasons I don't like watching it on the BBC - with endless profiles of team GB stars and pundits predicting medals all the way...

Don't get me wrong, I am behind team GB all the way and hope they win everything. I just don't expect them to win everything...

[aslird]

Originally Posted by tailwhip2000

does having 3 or 4 guys at the front REALLY make much aerodynamic difference to those behind?

it's not like in motor racing when behind a car where there is a clear shift of air etc and the chance to go faster.
if i was sat behind another cyclist i don't think i would feel THAT much benefit?

They are riding at roughly 30-35 mph - that is a massive amount of air to push through for the first rider - if you are directly behind the lead guy, then you are sitting in a massive slipstream - this can be noticed by the person behind often free wheeling, while the front person is peddling like a madman. Since no other team helped on the front, the 4 brits had too much work to do (you could say they were doing the work of 20 people).
They made a tactical mistake tho - i assume they either missed Cancelara and the other Swiss going past them, or they expected the Germans would help pull them back for Greipel. Since they didn't have team radios, there was no real way for them to know who was ahead of them in the breakaway - the 3 swiss and 3 spanish helped drive the front group too fast for the pelaton to catch up.

[GBDG1]

Road cycling will always be one of the least predictable sports. There are over 100 competitors, over 240km!

You can have tactics that will increase your chances from over 100/1 to maybe 4/1 or 6/1 but it will never be better than that. In the TDF they are over 20 stages, teams of 9 riders, team managers in support cars, and team radio to keep the cyclists updated.

[richp007]

What I don't understand is why Team GB thought anyone else would help the best sprinter in the world get into contention for the end?

Surely they must have prepared for that? I understand the comments folks have been making above, but bottom line is it was bad tactical management at the end of the day. Cav must be devastated.

[GBDG1]

Originally Posted by richp007

What I don't understand is why Team GB thought anyone else would help the best sprinter in the world get into contention for the end?

Surely they must have prepared for that? I understand the comments folks have been making above, but bottom line is it was bad tactical management at the end of the day. Cav must be devastated.

There is no wy to prepare, they usually have a team of 9, they were trying to do it with (in effect) 4 men.

It was expected the Germans would help out (griepel) and the Auzzies (Matt Goss). Cav is the best sprinter, but he still gets beaten a fair amount, there is also the matter of silver and bronze.

You can't have a plan B in such a long and complex race. Not if you want to win.

[dannius]

Gutted for Cav, he's the main GB Olympian I really wanted to win the gold.

It seemed a lot of the field weren't interested in trying for a medal?

[hdsport]

Originally Posted by richp007

Surely they must have prepared for that? I understand the comments folks have been making above, but bottom line is it was bad tactical management at the end of the day. Cav must be devastated.

Well it's the only way Cav could win and he's had 4 guys (and Bernie ) work flat out to do that for him and he maybe gutted not to win but will recognise the team did all they could.

They went with the strategy with the highest chance of win and that was a sprint finish it didn't work out but that's racing.

Their only option would of been to send Millar up the road in the break but then you aren't guaranteed it will work out either.

[sheriffwoody]

why couldn't Team GB drop back into the pack and almost force another team to take up the pace? or would that have been too risky?

[GBDG1]

Originally Posted by tailwhip2000

why couldn't Team GB drop back into the pack and almost force another team to take up the pace? or would that have been too risky?

If other teams were going to pick up the pace then they would have done. There is quite a lot of communication in the Pelaton and these guys spend a lot of time racing, and know each other very well.

[hdsport]

Originally Posted by tailwhip2000

why couldn't Team GB drop back into the pack and almost force another team to take up the pace? or would that have been too risky?

But it was likely they wouldn't have, those with guys in the breakaway would of been happy to do nothing and those sprinters teams (realistically Germany/Australia the latter who had O'Grady in the break) would of been been reluctant to do all the work and basically give it to Cav on plate (with a fresh lead out train), they wanted GB to have to work all day.

[inzaman]

Originally Posted by tailwhip2000

does having 3 or 4 guys at the front REALLY make much aerodynamic difference to those behind?

if i was sat behind another cyclist i don't think i would feel THAT much benefit?

Yes it does and yes you would as it makes a difference, apparently it is up to a third less exertion at the pro level. If it made no difference then a break away would never be caught by the peloton and 9 times out of 10 they are caught.

The other forum members have answered the rest of the questions.

[shoestring25]

it was stupid tactics by team GB. germany and GB were the only teams with quality sprinters. so no wonder all of the other nations wanted to try breaks aways to avoid a bunch sprint. once all the other nations had riders in the break away no wonder they didnt want to catch there own team mates. poor tactics by team GB just becuse it worked at the world championships did they think no one would get wise and try somthing different next time

[GBDG1]

Originally Posted by shoestring25

it was stupid tactics by team GB. germany and GB were the only teams with quality sprinters. so no wonder all of the other nations wanted to try breaks aways to avoid a bunch sprint. once all the other nations had riders in the break away no wonder they didnt want to catch there own team mates. poor tactics by team GB just becuse it worked at the world championships did they think no one would get wise and try somthing different next time

I've responded to the identical post in the other thread. Cycling is probably the most tactically complex sport in the world. We do not have the 5 best riders in the world. We have the best sprinter and two of the top all rounders. If we didn't have Cav in the team then Wiggo and Froom would be very very unlikely to win anything in tge road race. Launching Cav wasn't just our best option, it was our only serious option.

[shoestring25]

i dont belive that to be the case david miller won a stage in this years tour by going with a brakeaway and doing exactly what vinikorov did wining in a spint to the line.

cav might not have even won a spint anyway as hes not as fast as he was in previous years and greipels no mug and has beaten cav this year a couple of times in the tour

[GBDG1]

Originally Posted by shoestring25

i dont belive that to be the case david miller won a stage in this years tour by going with a brakeaway and doing exactly what vinikorov did wining in a spint to the line.

cav might not have even won a spint anyway as hes not as fast as he was in previous years and greipels no mug and has beaten cav this year a couple of times in the tour

You seem to be getting caught up. The reason that we were hyped to win was because Cav was in the team. If he hadn't have been, then we wouldn't have been fancied at all.

Then using the rational that becuase we were hyped up, we should have won under any circumstances, even if it wasn't a sprint. In a race of the quality of today, you cannot cover all bases with a 5 man team.

Millar is a decent cyclist, but a contender against LLS, Cancellara etc who were in the break away? Nah. Winning a stage in the tour is amazing, but there are 20+ to choose from, not everyone is contesting every day.

[mrm3]

Apparently 30% more effort if in front!

[shoestring25]

You seem to be getting caught up. The reason that we were hyped to win was because Cav was in the team. If he hadn't have been, then we wouldn't have been fancied at all.

give over frome and wiggins had awsome tour de france. and were also great in the time trial thats why i thought we should win. i ddint buy all the cav hype becuse he didnt look great in the tour and i think
greipel would of had him in a sprint anyway.

Then using the rational that becuase we were hyped up, we should have won under any circumstances, even if it wasn't a sprint. In a race of the quality of today, you cannot cover all bases with a 5 man team.

if you have the tactics right and have a man in the brake away then al least you have a chance to contend letting a 30 man brake away in the closing stages is a massive mistake

Millar is a decent cyclist, but a contender against LLS, Cancellara etc who were in the break away? Nah. Winning a stage in the tour is amazing, but there are 20+ to choose from, not everyone is contesting every day.

and where did LLS and cancellara finish ? nowhere its not about how big your name is its about getting tactics right. team GB had one tactic everone knew it and wasnt going to play there game

[inzaman]

Originally Posted by GBDG1

I've responded to the identical post in the other thread. Cycling is probably the most tactically complex sport in the world. We do not have the 5 best riders in the world. We have the best sprinter and two of the top all rounders. If we didn't have Cav in the team then Wiggo and Froom would be very very unlikely to win anything in tge road race. Launching Cav wasn't just our best option, it was our only serious option.

I agree with that. I wonder if next time there is a break away they just tell cav to get into it and sit there and do no work, that would then force the peloton into action if they didn't have a printer in the group. Okay you could also get another break away but hopefully the peloton would be working to catch it by then?

[hdsport]

Originally Posted by inzaman

I agree with that. I wonder if next time there is a break away they just tell cav to get into it and sit there and do no work, that would then force the peloton into action

but surely the breakaway (unless closed down immediately) would just keep attacking Cav especially if he was isolated. If they did that yesterday surely every climb of Box Hill would see an acceleration and he'd be hanging on without any team mates to pace him.

I think people have just got so obsessed that it would be a nailed on gold especially after the Tour when it was actually always going to be a tough ask and are now starting to over analyse it.

What's even worse have been people like that moron David Bond on the BBC (check out the comments on his blog) think he knows better than Brailsford and co.

[Ian J]

Originally Posted by hdsport

What's even worse have been people like that moron David Bond on the BBC (check out the comments on his blog) think he knows better than Brailsford and co.

It's the job of a sports reporter to ask pertinent questions and not behave like a sycophant and it doesn't make him a moron for asking what was quite a reasonable question in the circumstances.

Brailsford and co may be all knowledgeable according to you but 29th is hardly a success

[inzaman]

Originally Posted by hdsport

but surely the breakaway (unless closed down immediately) would just keep attacking Cav especially if he was isolated. If they did that yesterday surely every climb of Box Hill would see an acceleration and he'd be hanging on without any team mates to pace him.

I think people have just got so obsessed that it would be a nailed on gold especially after the Tour when it was actually always going to be a tough ask and are now starting to over analyse it.

What's even worse have been people like that moron David Bond on the BBC (check out the comments on his blog) think he knows better than Brailsford and co.

Not obsessed just a tactic, he did lose weight specifically for the climb and box hill is hardly an alpine pass.

[shoestring25]

cavs not as great as everyone makes out hes not a good all around cyclist he cant climb thats why he wont be in rio in 4 years time. he can only succed when a team puts him in the correct postion to sprint. he cant successfully get into and stay in a brakaway. hes not even the fastest sprinter about anymore greipel is just as quick.

wiggins and frome are far better all rounders and out of those frome was better than wiggins hes a better climber

[kopchoir]

The Germans and the Aussies both had sprinters with medal chances but chose to wait and see if GB could ride themselves out before the sprint. That would have given Greipel or Goss a chance to outsprint Cav and at worst a chance of a medal. Instead both of those countries went away with nothing. If they'd helped they may have a medal as well.

I don't think they expected help from teams without sprinters.